Re: [VOTE] 5.5.12 Stability
Henri Gomez wrote: Should we post-pone to 5.5.13 the fixes to Jasper2 ? +1 for the postponement(sp?) Also, +1 for 5.5.12 (Sol8 and Suse 9.2) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Releasing JK 1.2.15
Rainer Jung wrote: Hi Peter, Mladen and all others, I would like to follow Mladens suggestion from earlier this month to create a list of precise use cases for the load balancing, failover and administrative downtime scenarios. I think from that we might end up by a better understandable overal lb design. I expect, that we will find the need for bigger changes to lb. +1 -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: patch: mod_jk load balance algorithm that accounts for current worker load
On Aug 6, 2005, at 3:48 AM, Chris Lamprecht wrote: We'd like to submit our patch to mod_jk. We've added a new workers.properties lb.method option -- lb.method=B for Busyness, and updated the jkstatus display page accordingly. I wanted to get any feedback or suggestions from the mailing list before submitting the patch to bugzilla. Thanks, Please do so... There is also some overlap with Apache's proxy load balancer as well, which I would want to fold back in. For example, in Apache I added the bytraffic method, which was then folded into mod_jk by Mladen. So once busyness is added to mod_jk, I'll look on adding it to the Apache tree. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ANN/VOTE] JK 1.2.11 Released
Mladen Turk wrote: [X] Stable -- good build [ ] Alpha -- something serious is wrong: what is it? Testing so far is positive. -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RESULT] PMC Chair
What's the next step now ? Next is to draft a resolution to supply to the board, making Tomcat a TLP. It's easiest to look over the approved minutes and look at similar resolutions and use them as a guide. -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] PMC Chair
I would recommend that before anyone responds, we decide who should rec' and tally the votes. Also, votes should only be counted from those who will be on the new PMC. So before the vote: 1. Finalize list of PMC members (all current committers) 2. Determine who to collect and tally votes (I propose Henri Yandell) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TLP Draft Proposal
On Mar 23, 2005, at 5:07 PM, Costin Manolache wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: The PMC Chair has ultimate authority, since the position is board appointed and results in the Chair being a VP of the ASF. There's no precedent for sharing the role or having a co-Chair. The PMC Chair is the point man for the PMC. Yes, we know - that's one of the reasons some people want this to be a 'rotating' position. Sharing the role ( i.e. the tasks ) has a lot of precedents. I have no problem with someone having this kind of authority - in projects like Linux or Python, where the guy in charge created the project in the first place. I am not confortable at all with having the 'ultimate' authority appointed - even when (in most cases) it is at the recomandation of the community. IMO it is the worse of both worlds. The bylaws are quite clear, I think, regarding this: Section 6.3. Project Management Committees. In addition to the officers of the corporation, the Board of Directors may, by resolution, establish one or more Project Management Committees consisting of at least one officer of the corporation, who shall be designated chairman of such committee, and may include one or more other members of the corporation. Unless elected or appointed as an officer in accordance with Sections 6.1 and 6.4 of these Bylaws, a member of a Project Management Committee shall not be deemed an officer of the corporation. Each Project Management Committee shall be responsible for the active management of one or more projects identified by resolution of the Board of Directors which may include, without limitation, the creation or maintenance of open-source software for distribution to the public at no charge. Subject to the direction of the Board of Directors, the chairman of each Project Management Committee shall be primarily responsible for project(s) managed by such committee, and he or she shall establish rules and procedures for the day to day management of project(s) for which the committee is responsible - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TLP Draft Proposal
The PMC Chair has ultimate authority, since the position is board appointed and results in the Chair being a VP of the ASF. There's no precedent for sharing the role or having a co-Chair. The PMC Chair is the point man for the PMC. The PMC Chair is nominated by the PMC, and the recommendation is sent in with the PMC resolution. The board then debates the issue and will usually approve the resolution and appoint the nominated person as chair. Since the PMC Chair is the main guy for the PMC, it is even more an issue for that person to be very much an ASF weenie and understand and embrace the Apache Way... It can be a political and managerial kind of position and any candidate should realize that sad fact :/ -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TLP Draft Proposal
Mladen Turk wrote: Also I would like that we rather make a parliamentary rather then presidential type of government, with PMC making all major decisions, thus making a chairman our representative, not our boss. That is, of course, the normal method. It's the PMC Chair's duty to ensure that the PMC is operating according to the bylaws of the ASF, the charter of the PMC and in accordance with the Apache Way. As far as code development is concerned, he is just a normal committer, no more, no less. -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TLP Draft Proposal
Yoav Shapira wrote: Hi, I could... But there's the question of whether we want all committers on the PMC or just the active ones. The avail file has, in addition to the people I already listed: duncan,jon,rubys,akv,jhunter,preston,shemnon,shachor,bergsten,gonzo,mode,har ishp,arun,craigmcc,jluc,nacho,aried\ el,horwat,ed,alex,gaburici,jiricka,pierred,glenn,larryi,arieh,marcsaeg,danmi l,shai,keith,kief,melaquias,m\ braden,clucas,bip,seguin,mmanders,andya,ccain,bojan,patrickl,jazmin,ekr,manv een,cks,denisb,dsandbe\ rg,bobh,idarwin,johnturner,ecarmich,fuankg,clar,jim,wrowe John Turner, Jim J., Bill Rowe are obviously active, I'll add them right now. But many of the above are not active, emeritus committers... Personally, I would agree if people did not think I deserved PMC member status. I would be honored to accept, but would 100% understand if there were, well... thoughts that it was unwarranted :) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TLP Draft Proposal
Stefan Bodewig wrote: Part of the proposal is the initial PMC Chairman. [...] This is a rotating term anyways, Only if you want to make it one ... Strictly speaking the PMC chair is appointed by the board and not elected by the PMC. True, but the proposal should specify the Chair that has been voted on my the pre-PMC. The board usually appoints the person that the PMC has chosen -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TLP Draft Proposal
Costin Manolache wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: Personally, I would agree if people did not think I deserved PMC member status. I would be honored to accept, but would 100% understand if there were, well... thoughts that it was unwarranted :) I hope that Tomcat PMC will be one where each active committer who is willing will be a member, I don't want it to be an arbitrary and random process like it was in jakarta ( or asf membership ). If you are working on tomcat, I can't see why not be in PMC ( unless you really don't want to ) I would like to be on the PMC, but I didn't want to start any debates :) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Propose Jim Jagielski and William A. Rowe as JakartaTomcatConnectors commiters
Henri Gomez wrote: +1 for both of all. Should I understand they will works more on HTTPD related stuff and of course JK ?-) Yep, that's my intent :) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CVS commit request - jakarta-tomcat-connectors
jean-frederic clere wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: I'd like to request commit privs for the jakarta-tomcat-connectors tree. I will be working mostly on the apache/mod_jk integration aspects to complement what is going on in the httpd mod_proxy side. Great ;-)) you need to be in the jakarta group. I wanted to ping tomcat-dev 1st to see if there would be any issues, etc... first ;) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CVS commit request - jakarta-tomcat-connectors
I'd like to request commit privs for the jakarta-tomcat-connectors tree. I will be working mostly on the apache/mod_jk integration aspects to complement what is going on in the httpd mod_proxy side. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Custom load balancing algorithm and mod_jk???
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, we'd like to balance on CPU usage of tomcat servers that Apache is load balancing. Or, even, by having each tomcat app communicate with the balancer to tell it how busy it is. Our problem is that we receive a variety of requests, some of which are very resource intensive and tie up that tomcat for a good while. Hence a round-robin or balance factors algorithm are not very effective. Do you have any ideas of a possible solution? There's been talk, at least on the HTTPD side of things, to have the balancer mechanism be open to external weighting methods (for the httpd proxy module)... But it's only gone so far as it sure would be nice. -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Custom load balancing algorithm and mod_jk???
Mladen Turk wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: There's been talk, at least on the HTTPD side of things, to have the balancer mechanism be open to external weighting methods (for the httpd proxy module)... But it's only gone so far as it sure would be nice. But it is. You need to write your own mod_proxy_balancer. Everything else from creating balancers and balancer members is independat of algorithim itself. The balancer module has to find and return the worker, what ever algorithm used. I was referring to actually making better use of the tools that httpd brings to the table. Ala balancer sub-modules and optional functions. Not having to re-use/cut-paste a lot of existing code :) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SVN migration?
On Feb 5, 2005, at 1:57 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: 1) Eclipse support (nobody has mentioned a different IDE yet) http://subclipse.tigris.org/ -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ There 10 types of people: those who read binary and everyone else. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Tomcat as top level ASF Project
What's your opinions on moving Tomcat as top level project ? +1... If you want reasons/opinions, I can offer them. :) -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither - T.Jefferson - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Duplicate session IDs are *common*
At 10:42 AM -0800 1/10/03, Eric Rescorla wrote: Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Eric Rescorla wrote: Glenn Olander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 5) The strength of the PRNG is largely irrelevant As a user, I wouldn't trust any solution which lacks a check for duplicate session id's, regardless of the strength of the PRNG. This doesn't seem to me to be a plausible position in view of the fact that all of our security mechanisms absolutely depend on statistical uniqueness of randomly generated large numbers. These are 2 different points I think. If you randomly generate numbers between 1 and 1,000,000 you will, after a point in time, have duplicate numbers. Yes, but if you randomly generate numbers between 1 and 2^128, you'll have to generate roughly 2^64 random numbers to have a good chance of getting a duplicate. Sure, over time you'll get a duplicate, but in this context over time needs to be measured over a time scale far in excess of the time scale that is interesting. Of course, as you said, it depends on the range and the timespan. But it doesn't change the fact that randomness != uniqueness, which is what Glenn's point was I think. -- === Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither - T.Jefferson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
